RE: Prop 8 ruling makes me wanna kill people...

RE: Prop 8 ruling makes me wanna kill people... (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

stella41b -> RE: Prop 8 ruling makes me wanna kill people... (5/30/2009 11:58:22 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Bella1965 Actually, I understand transsexuals very well, having dated several and researched the subject. I had to become knowledgeable in order to deal with their wildly fluctuating emotional swings, irrational rages, sudden bouts of depression, etc. It is a mental disorder. Also classified as "Gender Identity Disorder" or "GID". It's documented, by many different sources, all current, all reliable. Your inability to accept the truth is your failing, not mine. When you grow up, you'll come to understand your views do not make the world so. Be equally aware, that "transsexuality" is not a word. Yes, I'm a spelling/grammar nazi. Bella I disagree - being a transsexual is a mental disorder? Are you sure? Actually it isn't, if anything it's a mental condition, not an illness, not a disorder, a state of being if you prefer. I'm actually a transsexual female, one with a few psychiatric opinions which state 'no evidence of any history of mental illness or emotional disturbance'. The actual mental disorder is gender dysphoria which is addressed through gender reassignment. Not all of us experience the wildly fluctuating emotional swings, irrational rages, sudden bouts of depression, etc, some of us are quite even tempered and emotionally balanced. However there was a time when being a transsexual was seen as a disorder back in the 1970's or 1980's. However with the coming of the Internet and advances in psychiatry these views have been changed and there's an abundance of more accurate knowledge available. I've met a few women recently with bipolar disorder, but my reasoning wouldn't go so far as to suggest that all women have a tendency to bipolar disorder as I know that would be a generalization.

BitaTruble -> RE: Prop 8 ruling makes me wanna kill people... (5/30/2009 12:11:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: GreedyTop what if the naturalised citizen doesn't believe in God...? It's a good question. There is a provision that allows for those words to be stricken and there are slight wording changes depending on where you are taking the oath, but all of them do call for alligence to and acceptance of the Constitution.

DomImus -> RE: Prop 8 ruling makes me wanna kill people... (5/30/2009 12:21:04 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Arpig However, that does not really address the question of whether it is discriminatory, and why in this case discrimination should be allowed. Somewhere earlier in this thread, this whole side issue was originally brought up as a justification, of sorts, for discrimination, and I think that may be somewhat of a slippery slope, I mean if one can justify discriminating against gay marriage by pointing out that the rules for the Presidency are discrimnatory, then why not use that as a justification (however slim) for any other form of discrimination. Any law can be spun as being discriminatory to some party or group. Speed limits discriminate against those with lead feet. There is a point where we have to break from black/white definitions of discrimination and apply some real world critical thought and yes, that becomes a slippery slope as you noted. As the Prop 8 dialog has shown those viewpoints can be both widely varied and highly passionate on both sides.

MissDominae -> RE: Prop 8 ruling makes me wanna kill people... (5/30/2009 12:21:25 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: beargonewild Technically it is not a birth defect per se, If abnormalities of cell division occur, a fetus with mosaicism may result. The baby may have both cells with 46 XY chromosomes and cells with 46 XX chromosomes. This condition has been called hermaphroditism (after the greek god Hermes and goddes Aphrodite) and it is one of many causes of intersex. Because both male (46-XY) and female (46-XX) cells exist within the same fetus, both male and female structures develop. Typically, the penis is not completely virilized (hypospadias). One or both testes may not be palpable or they may be palpable, but undescended. Whenever you see an infant with both hypospadias and an undescended testis (cryptorchidism), you must consider the possibility of intersex. Internally, Müllerian structures develop (uterus, oviducts, vagina). Gonadal tissue of both genders is present in various patterns: a testis on one side and an ovary on the other, a testis on one side and an ovo-testis (gonad containing both ovary and testis) on the other, or an ovary on one side and an ovo-testis on the other. source" http://www.meddean.luc.edu/lumen/MedEd/urology/hrmphdt.htm edited to correct info BGW, though your definition of Mosaicism - the condition I was born with - is accurate, the summation that it is not seen as a 'birth defect' is not. It shouldn't be confused with transsexualism (which may be a form of non-physically-presenting Intersexuality) but it is one of the spectrum of related disorders classed as Intersex and is considered my most western medical persons as a ambiguous gender presentation caused by a defect in cellular division at the mitotic levels - thus, a defect present at birth - and is treated as such, most commonly with surgical rectification (as in my case) shortly after birth. I heven't read back far enough to discover why this definition is at all important to the general discussion, but thought I should reply to offer some clarification.

Arpig -> RE: Prop 8 ruling makes me wanna kill people... (5/30/2009 12:26:23 PM)
quote: I heven't read back far enough to discover why this definition is at all important to the general discussion, but thought I should reply to offer some clarification. Don't worry, this thread has wandered far and wide, and seems to be about several things simultaniously....one of the best threads on CM in a long while in my opinion[:D]

GreedyTop -> RE: Prop 8 ruling makes me wanna kill people... (5/30/2009 12:35:25 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Arpig Well greedy, in that case they are obviously godless commie pinkos, and are thus unamerican and therefore ineligable for everything anyway snort quote: quote:BitaTrouble ORIGINAL: GreedyTop what if the naturalised citizen doesn't believe in God...? It's a good question. There is a provision that allows for those words to be stricken and there are slight wording changes depending on where you are taking the oath, but all of them do call for alligence to and acceptance of the Constitution. Wasnt there recently a big stink about some guy who wanted to be sworn in on the Quarn? (oops sorry for the crappy quoting) edited again because I dropped a letter...

LadyEllen -> RE: Prop 8 ruling makes me wanna kill people... (5/30/2009 12:37:35 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: GreedyTop Want there recently a big stink about some guy who wanted to be sworn in on the Quarn? Bet the beef lobby objected to that? And, if youre going to swear by Quorn in this life - of course there'll be a big stink wherever you go; it does that to a person E

GreedyTop -> RE: Prop 8 ruling makes me wanna kill people... (5/30/2009 12:39:22 PM)
adores Lady E There was a local politician here that wanted to be sworn in on the Quarn, IIRC....and it made national news... I could be wrong and, frankly, I dont feel like looking it up at the moment.... ETA: ok, got unlazy for a moment.. (I promise I wont make a regular habit of it..LOL) and granted, it's a Wiki hit... BUT: [/link] Has the koran ever been used to swear in any politician? In: [link=http://wiki.answers.com/Q/FAQ/2872-5]Political Office Holders [Edit categories] [Edit] In 2006, US Rep Keith Ellison (Minnosata's 5th district), a Muslim, was swon in on the Koran. Contrary to popular Internet lore, Barak Obama, a christian, was swon in using the Bible.

BitaTruble -> RE: Prop 8 ruling makes me wanna kill people... (5/30/2009 12:46:04 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Arpig However, that does not really address the question of whether it is discriminatory, and why in this case discrimination should be allowed. Somewhere earlier in this thread, this whole side issue was originally brought up as a justification, of sorts, for discrimination, and I think that may be somewhat of a slippery slope, I mean if one can justify discriminating against gay marriage by pointing out that the rules for the Presidency are discrimnatory, then why not use that as a justification (however slim) for any other form of discrimination. I gave a lot of thought to this question, Arpig. I think I would have to lean towards the law is not discriminatory because it applies equally to all foreign born but naturalized citizens. They have the option of staying in their own land and running for President (or PM etc) of it should they so choose. It all boils down to willing choices. It's like going to work for a company. You comply by their rules and wear a suit at your place of work, or, you find a new job. Is it discrimination or does a job (or a country) have the right to decide what one must comply with in order to work there (or live there.) Here's the other thing: I think most people who come here do so because they are seeking a better life or opportunities than they currently were getting. To that end, most of us have to play the cards we're dealt and trying to change your hand in the middle is going to have some consequences. That said, there is a positive to becoming a natuarlized citizen; your sons and daughters, born on this little slab of dirt we call the US, do have the opportunity to gain anything they are capable of gaining, including the highest office in the land. If it is a burden not to be allowed to become POTUS to the naturalized citizen, they have the option to try to get the Constitution changed. They agree to abide by it, but if they see something wrong with it, as citizens, they can do anything within their legal rights to change it. So, no, I don't think it's discrimination... because there is a process built into the Constitution which allow for changes to be made which meet the needs of its citizens and they, as naturalized citizens have the right to due process just like the rest of us.

DreamGoddess666 -> RE: Prop 8 ruling makes me wanna kill people... (5/30/2009 2:19:42 PM)
I wouldn't even call transsexuality a mental condition. There's simply no evidence. The "condition" has only ever been fixed through transition and surgery. No amount of therapy has ever proven successful. The only people who reverse it are usually born again Christians and the like who reverse it for religious reasons and then speak out against the transsexual community. If it were a mental condition, medication and therapy would prove effective AT LEAST some of the time. As it stands, there's no evidence to suggest that therapy or the like is effective in treating the "condition". Hence, by process of elimination and because of the treatments that are effective, it's very clearly a physical condition, a birth defect.

Arpig -> RE: Prop 8 ruling makes me wanna kill people... (5/30/2009 2:43:27 PM)
I'm not a doctor, nor am I particularly informed on the subject DG, but I tend to agree with your premise that it is not merely a mental issue. Years ago I saw something on TV (discovery channel or something similar) where they had discovered physical differences between male and female brains. The simple fact that therapy and medication have not proven effective does not however mean that it is not at least partially a mental issue, there is no end to the strange and wonderful things that can happen when brain chemistry is altered. It is entirely possible that there is a physical cause of a change in brain chemistry that causes transexuality (or homosexuality) to occur. In learning about autism (one of my UMs) I have learned that there can be miriad "causes" of various, mental/emotional/developmental issues, some genetic, some physical, some environmental, and quite possibly a combination of several. In my UMs case his autism is somehow linked to a gluten and casien intolerance, as well autistic spectrum disorders seem to run in my ex's family (Father, brother, and nephew all present with autistic criteria to some degree), and there is a history of celiac disease (an unrelated gluten intolerance issue) in her family. And just to make it more confusing, my UM first started displaying autistic behaviours just after he got his MMR vaccine. So as one can see, the potential sources of his problems are many and varied, I suspect it may well be the same thing with transexuality. The genetic issues in the earliest stages of development mentioned by Beargonewild (I believe it was him, please don't make me go back through all 29 pages to find out), or at least something along those lines, sound to me to be a very likely culprit, but for all we know it could be affected by something as obscure as what one's mother ate, or what chemicals she was exposed to during pregnancy. Or perhaps it is just pure chance or fate, we just don't know, and I see no reason to assume that there is one single "cause" for all transexuals.

Arpig -> RE: Prop 8 ruling makes me wanna kill people... (5/30/2009 2:47:47 PM)
I had another one of my somewhat random thoughts, please don't take offence to this, as none is intended, DG. If I have understood correctly, you are a male-to-female transexual who is attracted to women, I wonder, in fundamentalist christian eyes, does that make you a lesbian (and therefore a sinner) or are you considered heterosexual....I mean according to the dangly bits, you did start out male, and attracted to females, which is what they say is what counts. Something to ponder when you have nothing else to do [:)]

blacksword404 -> RE: Prop 8 ruling makes me wanna kill people... (5/30/2009 3:18:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BitaTruble Us vs Them isn't going to go away anytime soon even if it should or could. Is that valid? Yes, because as a whole, there is still a mob mentality in the US (witness the surge of support for the POTUS after 9/11). Until we grow up, we need our leader to be a blood relative.. a step-parent is only going to make us stomp our feet, place blame when things don't go right on his/her ethnicity and, if someone is really pissed off, the unthinkable could happen. We're not ready.. we have too much growing up to do. Celeste I was reading The Prince by Machiavelli last night. It's important for our leader to be one of us. For his own ass. It gives the people more of a reason to protect him. Do you think we would allow a leader from another country to depose our leader? Not here.

BitaTruble -> RE: Prop 8 ruling makes me wanna kill people... (5/30/2009 3:44:17 PM)
While I don't believe that ends justify means, I do share the trait with Machiavelli, that I call it as it is rather than as I wish it was.

blacksword404 -> RE: Prop 8 ruling makes me wanna kill people... (5/30/2009 4:15:47 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BitaTruble While I don't believe that ends justify means, I do share the trait with Machiavelli, that I call it as it is rather than as I wish it was. Some of the parts are funny as hell. Some because of the wisdom in it and some because it applies to some leaders we have recently had. I have heard it said that it is not important for the leader to know what he is talking about as long as his advisors do. I read this and laughed. "since it is an unerring rule and of universal application that a Prince who is not wise himself cannot be well advised by others unless by chance he surrender himself to be wholly governed by some one adviser who happens to be supremely prudent in which case he may indeed be well advised but not for long since such an adviser will soon deprive him of his Government. If he listen to a multitude of advisers the Prince who is not wise will never have consistent counsels nor will he know of himself how to reconcile them. Each of his counselors will study his own advantage and the Prince will be unable to detect or correct them.

Apocalypso -> RE: Prop 8 ruling makes me wanna kill people... (5/31/2009 1:25:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FatDomDaddy Even in times when homosexuality flourished, there was never, ever any concept of homosexual marriage. That's simply incorrect. Asia has same-sex unions (de facto marriages) recorded since ancient times. Ancient Rome had gay marriages until they were legally outlawed in 342 AD by Constantius II and Constans. And even then they're believed to have continued in some areas into the 12th century. While you may still be opposed to gay marriage, you can't claim tradition as the reason.

Bella1965 -> RE: Prop 8 ruling makes me wanna kill people... (5/31/2009 3:00:36 PM)
G'afternoon all: quote: ORIGINAL: stella41b Actually it isn't, if anything it's a mental condition, not an illness, not a disorder, a state of being if you prefer. I'll accept that definition, more of a case of semantics. I did mention the proper terminology (Gender Dysphoria) for the condition in my post to the OP. Her rant is that it is a birth defect rather than a mental condition, which is patently untrue. I won't paint all trans individuals with the same brush. I was speaking to my own experiences. Pardon if you assumed otherwise. Stay safe, play nice, & share your toys w/ others... [:D] Bella

CreativeDominant -> RE: Prop 8 ruling makes me wanna kill people... (6/1/2009 7:50:12 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: beargonewild quote: ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant quote: ORIGINAL: DreamGoddess666 dcnovice, you owned that one, bravo! [:)] The majority should NEVER be allowed to oppress the minority. When that happens, it's time to fight for what's right, fight against oppression, fight for freedom! But the minority should be allowed to oppress the majority? CD....please rethink this. This issue is NOT the minority to which I belong in trying to oppress the majority. It is trying to get the majority to modify and accept the minority. When you ask a question such as that, you imply that the minority is attempting to change the majority's way of thinking to our way, this is not so, we just want the equality and full acceptance into a society which perceives us as degenerates, filth and an abomination against the natural order of things. If we were trying to oppress the majority of the heterosexuals, then you'd see us using terrorist tactics in order to convert and subvert you to my way of living. The majority of us LGBT people simply want to co-exist in peace and have all rights and privileges that the heterosexual population have and are given: simply because you are attracted and sexual with the opposite sex. bear, my friend...I think you misunderstood me. I do not believe that passing a law that will allow for gay marriage will oppress the majority. I DO believe that FORCING the majority...as the originator of the post I was answering was alluding to...to be handed, and forced to accept, a law written by the legislature and made into law without bringing it to the people to vote on would be oppression of the majority. While the legislature deciding to push something into law without the acceptance of the majority might work for the minority in this instance, what happens when the legislature decides...because of another minority...to override the second amendment and outlaw guns? What happens when the legislature decides...because of another minority...to outlaw drinking altogether? What happens when the legislature decides...because of another minority...to override themselves, not go to the people, and declare homosexuality illegal? The system isn't perfect...no system is...but when you don't consider other actions that might be taken in the future because of the allowance of one "special instance/exception", then you make it more imperfect.

Arpig -> RE: Prop 8 ruling makes me wanna kill people... (6/1/2009 9:27:08 AM)
quote: to be handed, and forced to accept, a law written by the legislature and made into law without bringing it to the people to vote on would be oppression of the majority Isn't this the case with pretty much all laws? They are written by legislators (OK, actually their faceless, nameless staffers), and usually debated and passed without any reference to the people, who had their say on election day, and are generally not consulted thereafter.

CreativeDominant -> RE: Prop 8 ruling makes me wanna kill people... (6/1/2009 11:50:14 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Arpig quote: to be handed, and forced to accept, a law written by the legislature and made into law without bringing it to the people to vote on would be oppression of the majority Isn't this the case with pretty much all laws? They are written by legislators (OK, actually their faceless, nameless staffers), and usually debated and passed without any reference to the people, who had their say on election day, and are generally not consulted thereafter. Yes, but those laws are generally a reflection of the majority of the people those legislators represent, not a minority. Whether a person considers it valid or not, our republic was, at least in part, to stop the tyranny of the minority ruling over the majority and what the majority sought and yet, because of checks and balances, many channels exist to help those minority segments of society when the majority threatens to become tyrannical. One such way is to bring a referendum...such as was done in California...in front of the public and allow them to vote.

Page: << < prev 26 27 28 [29] 30 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875